ISIS, or the IS. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, now just the Islamic State. The history of the group, which has roots going back 15 years, is more extensive than what is portrayed by contemporary media. Their history is easy to look up. It’s the merit of their philosophy that I call into question.
ISIS claims to speak for Islam and the entire Muslim world; a group that can be measured in the thousands, speaking for billions. It’s not a crazy idea. The President of the United States, the Pope, various parliaments: they all represent and speak for disproportionately larger groups. There’s a key difference worth noting, though. ISIS was never elected. They are the equivalent of a despot, a group seizing power through the use of force and intimidation. They want to establish a Caliph, a cross between a Pope and a King, and a religious entity that hasn’t truly existed in centuries.
Does that mean they don’t speak for Islam? They certainly have a considerable amount of support, though nothing approaching a majority. Their viewpoints, from a Western perspective, aren’t anything new: Kill the infidels, overthrow the government, oppress the women, stop teaching arts and crafts in school, et cetera. It’s pretty easy to see these reoccurring themes and be happily convinced that Islam is a religion destined for self-destruction – though, with the prevalence of Islamic suicide bombers, their self-destruction is bad news for us.
Last Tuesday night, four LMU faculty members – Amir Hussain, Najwa al-Qattan, Feryal Cherif and SimonMary Aihiokhai gathered to discuss the question: In The Name of Islam? They addressed the question through the lenses of their respective areas of study, but failed to answer it succinctly. theology professor Aihiokhai summed up the nature of the discussion with a pithy statement many took for a joke. “I am not here to answer the question. I am here to confuse you the more.” ISIS is not the first group of its kind, and it isn’t particularly likely to be the last. Rather than understanding the group itself, I’d like to approach the bigger issue, the themes that keep leading us back here.
The Middle East is not a stable place right now. It happens. America hasn’t exactly helped. We’ve done some good; we’ve done some bad. It’s all but natural that a group like ISIS would show up. They want power. Who doesn’t? They want a stable government in the Middle East. So do we. They are content, eager even, to use extreme violence without regard to humanity or ethics in order to reach their questionable goals. That’s crossing the line, to say the least. At the event, host and theological studies lecturer Lee Greenberg pointed out: “Anyone can call themselves a Muslim.” That’s true. History professor Al-Qattan asked, “Is the KKK representative of Christianity?” I imagine you wouldn’t think so, but the Klan thinks of themselves as excellent Protestants.
I can argue that Islam is a religion of peace and that it strictly forbids such blatant violations of the sanctity of life. I can tell you that the extremist minority does not speak for the majority. I can tell you that this is what happens when you destabilize a region of the world for personal foreign interests. These are all true things, but none of them is truer than this: A group cannot be represented by someone who does not embody the values of the majority. As Al-Qattan so succinctly said, “We don’t need Islam, the concepts of Islam, or even an understanding of Jihad to understand the violence that ISIS perpetuates.”
